backing paper numbers show on negatives.

[Sirius Glass]

Maybe Kodak will start recalling film when the tobacco companies start recalling their products which cause cancer and death. No one ever got cancer from using film.

 

[StoneNYC]

That's not what I was suggesting. Since Kodak has a product out there that they KNOW is defective, they should recall that product and let people know that there is a high risk of failure to use it. I took my final walk in China shooting Kodak TMAX400. Had I been aware that this product was defective, I would not have used it. All my shots from my final walk were ruined with numbers imprinted all over the images.

Kodak can't claim ignorance about this problem and should be doing what they can to protect their customers. Very public announcements at their website are the very least that they can do, and they arent even doing that.

A "Very Public" announcement would probably mean lots of ignorant folk would just stop buying all Kodak and more negative talk about them.

They should probably recall the bathches from the major buyers (B&H) however they may have done that, but aren't publicising it. Which is the best they can do at this point.

I think they are doing the best they can in a situation that probably isn't really their fault.

Remember they are forced to produce much larger batches than other companies so they may not be able to recall the entire thing without taking such a hit they might have to stop making film. And you don't want that right?

It would be a good idea for them to sell it to lomography but I don't think they are THAT forward thinking.

 

[Lionel1972]

Can someone who received replacement film indicate here the date of expiration of the film sent by Kodak as not deficient ?

 

[Ai Print]

Can someone who received replacement film indicate here the date of expiration of the film sent by Kodak as not deficient ?

My replacement film is dated 04/2018. But that does not necessarily mean all film before that date is no good. I think it is somewhat safe to say that almost anything with a 02/2017 or 09/2017 expiration date *could* be suspect, but it seems to also depend on where it was purchased and I am wondering if it is limited to the pro packs or if it is individual rolls too.

In fact, when someone buys Tmax 120 as individual rolls from B&H, are they even in boxes or have they just shown up in the foil wrapper meaning B&H just simply pulled it from a pro pack?

 

[MartinP]

I'm british and don't speak american very well. Can someone clarify this please...

Kodak T-Max 400
Emulsion 0148 004 through 0152

Does this mean

"0148 004 to 0152 XXX"

or

"0148 004 to 0148 0152"

??

 

[mike c]

I am American but was thinking the same thing as you Martin.

 

[nworth]

John Sexton's latest newsletter (info@johnsexton.com) discusses this problem. It happens with certain Kodak 120 film batches. He lists:
Kodak T-Max 400
Emulsion 0148 004 through 0152

Kodak T-Max 100
Emulsion 0961 through 0981

Kodak Tri-X
Emulsion 0871 though 0931.
Kodak says that the cause was improper storage of some film in transit. In any case, they are changing the backing paper to prevent it from occurring again. Kodak asks anyone having this problem to report it to: Profilm@Kodakalaris.com.

 

[Photo Engineer]

How about anyone with the film. It should be replaced unused, no questions asked.

PE

 

[pentaxuser]

Isn't this the classic case on the need to combine two threads. If it had not have been for MichaelR1974 sharing the John Sexton newsletter then those only following this thread might have remained ignorant of the vital information.

pentaxuser

 

[ColColt]

Kodak Tri-X
Emulsion 0871 though 0931

Wow, that was close. I just looked at a pro pack I recently bought and the code is 0932.

 

[canuhead]

hmm, I've been using Tri X 0931 with no issues. Bought from B&H maybe early this year or late last year. or was it Adorama ?

 

[Photo Engineer]

hmm, I've been using Tri X 0931 with no issues. Bought from B&H maybe early this year or late last year. or was it Adorama ?

The source may be critical if it is indeed an exposure to heat during shipping.

PE

 

[canuhead]

Just checked my expens reports and it's from Adorama, bought March of this year.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

How about anyone with the film. It should be replaced unused, no questions asked.

PE

Bravo to you again, PE. You speak the truth despite your earned loyalty to EKC.

 

[MattKing]

Just checked my expens reports and it's from Adorama, bought March of this year.

And which source did Adorama buy it from? Probably the least expensive source available at the time.
And how did it get to them? Probably the least expensive delivery option available at the time.

These are the complexities that form the modern reality.

 

[MattKing]

I've started another thread on this subject, for the purpose of putting John Sexton's information right at the beginning. You can find it here: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Hi!


I spent six weeks in san Francisco, shooting my Mamiya 7. i also shoot a linhof technikardan 69, with rollfilm.


I shot Kodak Tmax 400, exposed to 800 ASA, pushed one stop in developing, developed in Tmax developer.


All my films show the markings of the backing paper numbers on my clear sky portions. They are darker than the surrounding sky.


I developed the film eight to two weeks after it was exposed. I didn't refrigerate the film, it was kept at room temperature in a cloth bag.


I've been using kodak Tmax 400 for a few years, and never had this before. this is the first time, however, that I didn't develop the film immediately.


I'm 100% sure it isn't a light leak problem.


I'd like to continue using roll film on longer trips, with the Technikardan.


Does anyone know what causes this and what I can do to prevent it? like putting the film in bags with silicagel?


Thank you,


Dirk.

Happened to me once when I loaded the film wrong and exposed the back paper rather than the film.

 

[Platinum Printer]

This has been happening to me lately-very frustrating! Lots of time, energy and money wasted! Images ruined! Even more frustrating is the dismissive attitude of the salesperson where I bought the film. Because this has happened with four different cameras, one a Hasselblad, all fresh film, shot at most a week from the day I bought it, 2 different (also fresh) developers, and after reading this thread, I'm sure the problem originated with Kodak. I really hope they fix this issue because the thought of having to start work with a new film after all the tests I've done to get my process down is extremely disheartening. Though I'm sorry that others had to go through this, it's a relief to have answers and to know I'm not the only one.

 

[Ai Print]

I went straight to Kodak right when I got my first bad roll and gave them a list of all my batch numbers, how much film I had and how much I still had left to process which was 13 rolls. Out of the 13 rolls 8 turned out unusable with the imprinting, they were all from bad batch numbers.

Kodak replaced the film, it's all I could ask for given that they can not reshoot my lost images, pay the hundreds of dollars in travel expenses and thousands of dollars in lost income from not completing a commission.

Check the emulsion number on the bottom of the frame on each roll, it is beyond frame 11, should be easy to find.

This has been happening to me lately-very frustrating! Lots of time, energy and money wasted! Images ruined! Even more frustrating is the dismissive attitude of the salesperson where I bought the film. Because this has happened with four different cameras, one a Hasselblad, all fresh film, shot at most a week from the day I bought it, 2 different (also fresh) developers, and after reading this thread, I'm sure the problem originated with Kodak. I really hope they fix this issue because the thought of having to start work with a new film after all the tests I've done to get my process down is extremely disheartening. Though I'm sorry that others had to go through this, it's a relief to have answers and to know I'm not the only one.

 

[Platinum Printer]

Ugh! Ai Print, that's awful! I feel your pain. Replacing the film definitely seems like the least they can do. But glad you posted here. I'll check the emulsion numbers.

 

[Xmas]

And that company makes it for Ilford??

Kodak knows when changes were made and what they were. With that in hand they can test for the elements that caused the problem and when and why it took place. That is a rather short, intense series of tests for a start.

PE

Yes a pro pack or two and an oven?

But when I worked with a US company they had always tested in coming goods components and kept records.
Which my UK company had not done.
When I asked for an analysis the USA company supplied their analysis.
Would EK not have tested the paper for transfer, leaks, etc. Especially if it was a new process, an expensive piece part and critical.
Given that apparently Ilford have the same paper supplier and had problems earlier.
Letting Ratty find out the hard way, is not good PR.
Not quarantining likely batches is wayward?
When I shot weddings on Kchrome25 always bought brick of ten shot one and processed and projected before the wedding day never had a problem with film.
An earlier century?

 

[Xmas]

Maybe Kodak will start recalling film when the tobacco companies start recalling their products which cause cancer and death. No one ever got cancer from using film.

Death did not alter their sales figures.
Numbers in the sky will put people off Kodak and film.
I need to check my batch numbers next.
120 and inkjet cartridges were the last Kodak products I buy. Won't buy more.

 

[railwayman3]

Maybe Kodak will start recalling film when the tobacco companies start recalling their products which cause cancer and death. No one ever got cancer from using film.

It's well-known that tobacco use causes cancer and death, but I have the free choice not to use it. If I want to take analog photos, I need film and it's not unreasonable to expect fresh product from the "top brand" to be usable without unexpected problems. I'd hope that any big brand name would stand by its products. (Not knocking Kodak or anyone, just saying.....)

 

[RattyMouse]

This has been happening to me lately-very frustrating! Lots of time, energy and money wasted! Images ruined! Even more frustrating is the dismissive attitude of the salesperson where I bought the film. Because this has happened with four different cameras, one a Hasselblad, all fresh film, shot at most a week from the day I bought it, 2 different (also fresh) developers, and after reading this thread, I'm sure the problem originated with Kodak. I really hope they fix this issue because the thought of having to start work with a new film after all the tests I've done to get my process down is extremely disheartening. Though I'm sorry that others had to go through this, it's a relief to have answers and to know I'm not the only one.

No you are not the only one. This problem has been on going for a L O N G time.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

This seems to be a problem with many films, regardless of brand and film type...

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153279

http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00W5EX

http://forum.mflenses.com/rollei-retro-80-120-light-leak-t48361.html